Challenges to Reform under the Qajars in Iran from the Mid-19th to Early 20th Century - Essay Example

CHALLENGES TO REFORM UNDER THE QAJARS IN IRAN FROM THE MID-19TH TO EARLY 20TH CENTURY by Introduction Iran entered into a phase of nation building and nationalism in the 19th century with the a long history of cultural awareness of its identity. The period between mid-19th century and early 20th century was a phase of reformation in Iran under the Qajars. New western ideas had reached the east including Iran. These ideas caused reconstructions and modifications of pre-existing Iranian identity existent for over a thousand years. During this time, Iran was one of the countries that was among the few nations that experienced nationalism and recurrent construction of their own pre-modern identity. This paper will discuss the manner in which religion and socio-economic factors challenged reform under the Qajars in Iran from the mid-19th to early 20th century. Religion In any society, religion is an important aspect especially in development and reforms issues. In the Iranian society, between the periods of mid-19th century and early 20th century, reformation occurred in terms of nationality, identity, politics and the constitution. In these reformations, religion was an important aspect. Islam was the main and most famous religion in Iran and reflected the definite economic trends and the changes in class interests, property relations and social tendencies. Islam was an integral part of leadership, political, economic and social lives of people in Iran at this time. Thus, it influenced the type of reformation that occurred in the country. During the Qajar dynasty in Iran, the political leadership and governance of the country was a weak centralized regime that had strong provincial tribal forces and an independent religious establishment (Lapidus, 2002:65). European conquests, cultural influence and economic expedition made the state and society weak and encouraged constitutional revolution. However, Islam opposed the reformations that were introduced by the Europeans especially because the reforms were seen as a conflict of religious interest between Christianity from Europe and Islam that had existed in Iran for a good while. For instance, Europeans wanted women to be educated similarly to men, something that Islam was against because according to its customs, women were not the same as men, were not allowed to get an education but remain at home, and serve their families (Nomani & Behdad, 2006:127). The fact that the Qajars wanted to maintain a tenuous suzerainty enhanced the power of the religious establishments. The independence of the religious establishment hit the Qajars hard. The Ulama of Iran had a strong leadership and organizational coherence with support from citizens of Iran. The Ulama had a right to exercise independent judgment. The Ulama and the spiritual centers of Shiism in Iraq were made stronger by a system of communication where the Iraqi shrines gave Iranian Shiism bases that could be used without the control and disturbance of the Qajar monarchy (Sedghi, 2007:40). The religious establishment had ties with the state, common people, the bazaar population of artisans and merchants. These ties were important. The religious establishment was capable of political and religious action. Therefore, when its leaders opposed a reform objective, it became very hard to implement it. The modern Islamist thinkers and westernized intellectuals wanted the country to be modernized because it was the only way that they could ensure that foreign control was resisted. However, the reform program was hindered by the same Islamist rulers who feared that modernization, same as foreign interference, would weaken their authority in the country (Sedghi, 2007:40). The political leadership under Fath Alisha (1797-1834) that existed early in the Qajar dynasty protected and worked well with the religious leaders, the Ulama notables. The Qajar appointed the Ulama into official position in government to act as mediators between the government and the populace. However, the Qajar rulers that followed threatened this relationship and the power that the religious establishment had with the government and the people. Therefore, to prevent this, the religious establishment had to undermine the reform agenda under the Qajar rule. During Naser o-Din Sha’s reign, reformations such as the introduction of western technology, education and science methods were introduced to the country ways of modernization but these were met with resistance from the religious establishment (Bayat, 1982:67). Any reform on the rights of religious minorities and non-Muslims that would lead to equal treatment met resistance such that these reforms could not be implemented. For example, the Zoroastrian community petition on the Majlis, for equal treatment for all irrespective of religious belief, met with resistance. The Majlis argued that the state had a sacred role of enforcing Sharia law that distinguished between Muslims and non-Muslims. Therefore, this was to be applied in public life throughout Iran, which meant that a reform that contradicted this could not be tolerated (Abrahamian, 299). Social factors Several social factors challenged the needed reforms in Iran under the Qajars from the mid-19th to early 20th century. First, most people in Iran at this particular point in time had a mindset that was against reform. For example, there was an attempt to create a modern army based on European style. This made the government import modern arms and weaponry from Europe for use and production in Iran. Students were also sent to Europe to learn the relevant skills that could enable them to operate the machinery. Military trainers from Europe were also brought in to help with the reform. However, this did not work because the people that would drive this reform were few in scope and number. In addition, the Iran context at this time remained unchanged, yet people were expected to take up such developments. The society never implemented this reform making it useless (Abrahamian, 1982:177). Another reform was educational reform in the Iranian society. The government was supposed to fund and lead this reform to ensure that the whole society accepted it. In fact, Dar al-Fonun, a government-sponsored school was established to start the reformation program. European teachers were brought in to teach science. However, lack of commitment and opposition from Iranian people weakened the educational reform because of the fear that it could threaten their culture and society (Bayat, 1982:34). The relationship between the leaders was also a factor that undermined reform in the Qajar era. For example, the Prime Minister Mirza Taqi Khan Amir Kabir tried to reform the government under Mohammad Ali in 1848 when it faced growing European influence. He reformed the tax system in the country and developed a chain of command within the bureaucracy and provinces in Iran. However, jealously and fear of his growing power and popularity halted the reforms he started to the extent that he was fired and assassinated in 1851. Such relationships between high profile government officials acted as a challenge to reforms (Amanat, 1991:578). During this time, the social life in Iran was under the class system and there was a narrow stratum of courtiers, tribal leaders, state officials, religious notables, property owners and the peasants, laborers, tribe’s people and services. Difference was made between the nobles on one hand and the commoners on the other. These classes created challenges for the reforms because the higher classes fought amongst themselves because of the power relations between them and with the lower class. As such, the introduction of reforms was marred by this infighting that made it difficult for progression. The social setting in Iran did not consider every person equal as described by the class systems, men versus women and adults versus children. The reform that dealt with issues of rights for religious minorities and the role of women in society met resistance because the culture and customs of the Iran community could not allow this (Abrahamian, 1969:299). Economic factors In terms of basic economic structure, Persia displayed characteristics of a backward economy. Persia was dominated by agricultural and land related activities that sustained the livelihood of the nation in terms of both the high and low class. It also had ill developed and few roads and infrastructure network that characterized the low level of urbanization in the country. The country did also have limited but increasing internal and external trade. These issues could not support the reforms in the country at the time especially because of the fact that the reforms required a lot of funding. For example, educational reform required full funding from the government in establishing new schools, funding new equipment that would support a curriculum focusing on science and technology, hiring foreign teachers, and paying their salaries. All these issues required adequate funding, which the government could not afford because of the many commitments it had in addition to opposition of such reforms. In this regard, economical factors hindered the success of the reforms that had been introduced in the Qajars’ time (Hambly, 1964:69). Three factors contributed to the disruption of Persian economy and influence its backwardness at the time. The first was the lack of an administrative elite and tradition that could encourage and push for the success of the process of change and development. The Qajars engaged in other issues, for instance, fighting with the religious establishments, infighting between the elites, progressing individual interests and forces that threatened their governance. This made the Qajars refocus from the reforms. The second factor was the problems that the country’s irrigation systems faced when labor was reduced because of forcible eviction. Agriculture was one of the strongest supporters of Iranian economy. Therefore, the weakening of irrigation systems meant a slump in the profits from agriculture. Therefore, the reduction of funds that came from agriculture meant that the reforms could suffer. The second factor is related in every sense to the third, which is the underutilization of the agricultural potential that came about because of pastoral nomadism that occupied large parts of the country. The underutilization of land meant that more funds that could have been redirected to reform agenda and programs were not realized (Hambly, p. 71; Abrahamian, pp. 14-16). The trade ties between Persia and Russia and the rivalries between Russia and Britain on safeguarding strategic and economic access to colonies interfered with reform especially economic reform in Iran. Western economies conducted indirect and defensive type of trade with Persia because of the imperial rivalry between Russia and Britain (Hambly, 1964:74). This made European nations to engage in trade with Persia but with a passive presence of European capital and large-scale settlements. This made it difficult for Iran to implement reforms especially those that were influenced by the western world, such as education, science and technology and equality for all persons (Curzon, Persian Question & Entner, 1965:13). Conclusion The paper has discussed the manner in which religion and socio-economic factors challenged reform under the Qajars in Iran from the mid-19th to early 20th century. Issues of religious beliefs and customs, the class system in Iran under the Qajars, the place of religious minorities and women in the Iranian society, the reliance of Iranian economy on agriculture, trade ties with the outside world and the elite interests among other issues made it difficult for reform programs to progress. However, despite the challenges, several issues changed under the Qajars. The slight trade interactions with Europeans helped to change the Persian economy and the modernization of Iranian culture. Reference List Abrahamian, E 1969, The crowd in the Persian revolution. Iranian Studies, 2(4), 128-315. Abrahamian, E 1974, Oriental Despotism. The Case of Qajar Iran, IJMES 5(1), 1974, pp. 3-31. Abrahamian, E 1982, Iran between two revolutions. Princeton University Press. Amanat, A 1991, The downfall of Mirza Taqi Khan Amir Kabir and the problem of ministerial authority in Qajar Iran. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 23(04), 577-599. Bayat, M 1982, Mysticism and Dissent: Socioreligious Thought in Qajar Iran. Syracuse University Press. Curzon, Persian Question & Entner, M. L. 1965, Russo-Persian Commercial Relations, 1828-1914, Gainsville. Hambly, G 1964, An Introduction to the Economic Organization of Early Qajar Iran, Iran 2, 1964, pp. 69-81. Lapidus, IM 2002, A History of Islamic Societies. London: Cambridge University Press. Nomani, F. & Behdad, S 2006, Class and Labor in Iran: Did the Revolution Matter? Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, pp.126-134. Sedghi, H 2007, Women and politics in Iran. New York: Cambridge University Press. Read More